Government debates 42 day detention limit...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Not comfortable with the idea (for obvious reasons) but prefer it to allowing phone-tap evidence to be used in court. In fact I'm not happy with the use of phone-tapping at all, though I guess it might/is be necessary in exceptional circumstances.

Explanation: basically I don't trust the police and would rather have someone unjustly locked up for 42 days than someone unjustly convincted via entrapment and so on and getting life. Of course ideally I'd have neither.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Where in the blue blazes do they come up with 50 days or even 42 days as either necessary; reasonable; or prudent?

Is there any logical basis for their conclusions or is this just a case of 'look how tough on terror we are'?

Most things to do with anti-terrorism legislation is based on political posturing and this is no different (though it is less than the number Blair wanted. What was that; 72? Or longer? Can't recall actually). There are Tory M.P's who were happy with internment in Northern Ireland who are opposed to this and there are, I think, Labour M.P's who were opposed to internment in Northern Ireland but who support this.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

90, IIRC *shudder*

I'm sure there was a "2" in there somewhere. 92?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

True. But then issues like this bring out the worst in politicians. Mainly because they also bring out the worst in ordinary people.